Abstract
Introduction/Objectives: Artificial intelligence (AI) is revolutionizing research in Anesthesia and Pain Medicine by improving data analysis, systematic reviews, and clinical applications. However, its adoption brings up concerns about transparency, ethical considerations, and reproducibility. This study examines how top Anesthesia and Pain Medicine journals tackle these issues and opportunities through their author guidelines and policies.
Methods: A cross-sectional review was conducted of the top 100 peer-reviewed Anesthesia and Pain Medicine journals, ranked according to the 2023 SCImago SJR indicator. Data were extracted from the "Instructions for Authors" sections of each journal to assess AI-related policies, including reporting guidelines specific to AI, criteria for authorship, and the incorporation of AI in manuscript preparation and image generation. Correlational analyses were then performed to examine the relationship between these AI policies and the characteristics of the journals.
Results: Of the 100 journals evaluated, 63% addressed AI use in their instructions, with most prohibiting AI authorship while requiring disclosure of AI involvement in submissions. AI-generated content was allowed by 31% of journals, while 29% approved of AI-generated images. Journals with higher impact factors were more likely to include detailed AI policies, but significant gaps in standardization and guidance remain.
Conclusion: Although many Anesthesia and Pain Medicine journals acknowledge the role of AI in research, only a few support AI-specific reporting guidelines, which hampers the standardization and transparency of AI usage. We advocate for implementing comprehensive guidelines to promote ethical, reproducible, and high-quality research in the age of AI-driven innovation.
Methods: A cross-sectional review was conducted of the top 100 peer-reviewed Anesthesia and Pain Medicine journals, ranked according to the 2023 SCImago SJR indicator. Data were extracted from the "Instructions for Authors" sections of each journal to assess AI-related policies, including reporting guidelines specific to AI, criteria for authorship, and the incorporation of AI in manuscript preparation and image generation. Correlational analyses were then performed to examine the relationship between these AI policies and the characteristics of the journals.
Results: Of the 100 journals evaluated, 63% addressed AI use in their instructions, with most prohibiting AI authorship while requiring disclosure of AI involvement in submissions. AI-generated content was allowed by 31% of journals, while 29% approved of AI-generated images. Journals with higher impact factors were more likely to include detailed AI policies, but significant gaps in standardization and guidance remain.
Conclusion: Although many Anesthesia and Pain Medicine journals acknowledge the role of AI in research, only a few support AI-specific reporting guidelines, which hampers the standardization and transparency of AI usage. We advocate for implementing comprehensive guidelines to promote ethical, reproducible, and high-quality research in the age of AI-driven innovation.
| Original language | American English |
|---|---|
| State | Published - 14 Feb 2025 |
| Event | Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences Research Week 2025 - Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences, Tulsa, United States Duration: 10 Feb 2025 → 14 Feb 2025 https://medicine.okstate.edu/research/research_days.html |
Conference
| Conference | Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences Research Week 2025 |
|---|---|
| Country/Territory | United States |
| City | Tulsa |
| Period | 10/02/25 → 14/02/25 |
| Internet address |
Keywords
- Artificial Intelligence
- reporting guidelines
- authorship
- anesthesia and pain medicine
- transparency